“the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.”…LA Times October 27, 2014

“The secret of life is honesty, and fair
dealing. If you can fake that you’ve got it made.”…Groucho Marx

If your company is ethical, you should not have to advertise it. Customers, employees and those you deal with will know.

From Thrivent February 26, 2019.

“THRIVENT NAMED ONE OF THE WORLD’S MOST ETHICAL COMPANIES® BY ETHISPHERE FOR THE 8TH TIME”

“Thrivent, a not-for-profit membership organization that helps members be wise with money and live generously, has been recognized by the Ethisphere Institute, a global leader in defining and advancing the standards of ethical business practices, as one of the 2019 World’s Most Ethical Companies.

Thrivent has been recognized eight years in a row and is one of only five honorees in the financial services industry.

In 2019, 128 honorees were recognized spanning 21 countries and 50 industries. The 13th class of honorees profoundly illustrates how companies continue to be the driving force for improving communities, building capable and empowered workforces, and fostering corporate cultures focused on ethics and a strong sense of purpose.

“We’re proud to once again be named one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies,” said Terry Rasmussen, president and CEO of Thrivent. “At Thrivent, we are purposeful and intentional about following ethical business practices and ensuring our actions reflect commitment, collaboration and care. Setting this high standard helps us fulfill our mission of serving more Christians on their wise with money journeys.”

Said Ethisphere’s Chief Executive Officer, Timothy Erblich: “Today, employees, investors and stakeholders are putting their greatest trust in companies to take leadership on societal issues. Companies that take the long view with a purpose-based strategy are proven to not only outperform but last. I congratulate everyone at Thrivent for earning this recognition.”

Methodology & ScoringThe World’s Most Ethical Companies assessment is based upon the Ethisphere Institute’s Ethics Quotient® (EQ) framework, which offers a quantitative way to assess a company’s performance in an objective, consistent and standardized manner. The information collected provides a comprehensive sampling of definitive criteria of core competencies rather than all aspects of corporate governance, risk, sustainability, compliance and ethics.

Scores are generated in five key categories: ethics and compliance program (35 percent), culture of ethics (20 percent), corporate citizenship and responsibility (20 percent), governance (15 percent) and leadership and reputation (10 percent). All companies that participate in the assessment process receive their scores, providing them with valuable insights into how they stack up against leading organizations.”

“For the last seven years, Thrivent has been honored to be named a World’s Most Ethical Company,” said Brad Hewitt, CEO of Thrivent. “As we serve our members and carry out what it means to be an ethical company through our actions and business practices, we are pleased to be recognized as leaders in setting a standard that we hope will continue to develop within the business community.”

_____

“The Ethisphere Insitute, which describes itself as “a leading international think-tank dedicated to the creation, advancement and sharing of best practices in business ethics, corporate social responsibility, anti-corruption and sustainability,” is actually a for-profit company. The institute also lends itself credibility with an “advisory panel” of ethicists, yet several former members say they’ve had little if anything to do with it. Finally, the institute and an affiliated company sell services to and collect fees from some of the same companies Ethisphere extols.”

“The scoring is based mostly on information provided by the companies themselves, and Ethisphere says its questionnaire should take 30 to 40 minutes to complete. Ethisphere then asks companies for documentation to support survey answers and reviews other sources, such as news articles, court records, and Consumer Reports. Ethisphere says it reviewed more than 10,000 corporations for last year’s list.

Brigham acknowledges that the system is imperfect. “Could they be lying to us?” he says. “Sure, they could. … Over time, we’re going to have to figure out how to verify that. And no one is going to pay us to verify it, and if we try to charge them to verify it, we’re going to have reporters like you make it sound like we’re getting paid off.”

Ethisphere says its methodology was developed with the help of a panel of independent experts. But as I dialed up half a dozen of the 20 committee members, I found only one (George Ash) who said he actually contributed to shaping the methodology. Others said they made a suggestion that wasn’t heeded (Thomas Donaldson), or didn’t seriously analyze the methodology (Patrick Barwise, John Dienhart, Chris MacDonald), or didn’t know they were on the panel (Karen Paul). Ethisphere says that it assumed panel members who didn’t respond to its queries simply agreed with the methodology and that each member explicitly agreed to be on the panel. Since my inquiries, Ethisphere has named a new, smaller panel, and none of the people I spoke to are still on it.”

“It’s tempting, of course, to dismiss all this as just corporate window-dressing, and in fact Canadian ethicist Chris MacDonald, who until recently was on Ethisphere’s advisory panel, warned me to take such awards “with a grain of salt.””

_____

“Apparently, Blue Shield and Ethisphere haven’t quite grasped that the appearance of a conflict can be just as troubling as an actual conflict.

Nor do they seem to understand that the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.

Thrivent employees not required to be Christian, Thrivent misrepresentation, Martin Luther: justified by faith we are sent by God into our vocations to love and serve our neighbors

“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.”…Matthew 6:24

“Am I now seeking the approval of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.”…Galatians 1:10

“You don’t need to be Christian to join our team. You do need the passion to guide our members on their Wise With Money Journey”…Thrivent claims operations manager employment ad

From a recent Thrivent employment ad for a Claims Operations Manager:

“You don’t need to be Christian to join our team. You do need the passion to guide our members on their Wise With Money Journey”

THAT EXPLAINS MUCH.

Thrivent portrays their commitment to “core Christian values.” in the following ways:

“CEO Brad Hewitt told the 1,600 members at the regional meeting at the Henry Ford Museum that while Thrivent traces its corporate roots to the turn of the 20th century, its history goes back to the 16th century and the founder of Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther.

Luther drafted a document in 1523 called the “Fraternal Agreement on the Common Chest of the Entire Assembly at Leisnig,” which established rules about pooling resources to help people in need.

“The phrase he used consistently was, ‘This is done for the honor of God and the love of fellow Christians,’” Hewitt said, adding that Thrivent was formed by Lutheran immigrants for the same basic purpose.”

“Thrivent contends that its commitment to individual arbitration is “important to the membership because it reflects Thrivent’s Christian Common Bond, helps preserve members’ fraternal relationships, and avoids protracted and adversarial litigation that could undermine Thrivent’s core mission.””

It is impossible for non Christians to treat others with values and actions that can only emanate from someone who is a Christian.

Therefore, Thrivent has misrepresented their positions.

Martin Luther rejected the working (or buying) your way into heaven and grace through one’s works and efforts that had evolved in the Roman Catholic Church.

Instead, he explained that good works and love for one’s neighbor are a natural product of one’s faith and love for and obedience to God.

Martin Luther on Christian life and vocations.

From “Working for Our Neighbor”:

“For Martin Luther, vocation is nothing less than the locus of the Christian life. God works in and through vocation, but he does so by calling human beings to work in their vocations. In Jesus Christ, who bore our sins and gives us new life in his resurrection, God saves us for eternal life. But in the meantime he places us in our temporal life where we grow in faith and holiness. In our various callings—as spouse, parent, church member, citizen, and worker—we are to live out our faith.”

“Loving and Serving Our Neighbors
God does not need our good works, Luther said, but our neighbor does (Wingren, Luther on Vocation, 10). Our relationship with God is based completely on his work for us in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Justification by faith completely excludes any kind of dependence on our good works for our salvation. We come before God clothed not in our own works or merits, but solely in the works and merits of Christ, which are imputed to us. But having been justified by faith, we are sent by God back into the world, into our vocations, to love and serve our neighbors.”

“The economic vocations give us many neighbors whom we are to love and serve: customers, to be sure”

“Vocation Counters Our Materialism
Vocation counters the materialism and self-centeredness of economic pursuits by giving them a new meaning and a new orientation. Similarly, vocation also transforms other social relationships, such as the nature of authority.”

” Luther’s view of justification turned this ethical system on its head and placed Christian ethics into two realms of life in God’s world. In the divine realm, or right-hand rule of God, Christian righteousness is something that proceeds from faith alone and is therefore impossible apart from faith. No matter how good a person is in terms of ethical behavior (what the Lutheran reformers call human righteousness), such a person has no Christian righteousness without faith in Christ, from which Christian righteousness blooms as fruit from a good tree.”

““Gifted by him, Christ’s holy people live their lives enveloped in Christ’s gifts and forgiveness, serving their neighbor in word and deed. Yet there are always temptations in the world that seek to diminish Jesus. Luther warns, “Therefore Satan continually mounts a new battle against us” (WA 40 I: 318, 12; AE 26: 193).23 The devil “often suggests a false Christ to me” (WA 40 I: 321, 32-33; AE 26: 196).24 Since Christians are powerless before Satan, their daily life of vocation is a daily return to baptism.

Luther presents the life of Christians in their daily callings as a life that is lived within the forgiveness of sins. Ethics may not be detached from the body and blood of Jesus that the baptized receive. This is where the forgiveness is bestowed (WA 18: 203, 39-204, 9; AE 40: 214). Bodied together and blooded together, the communicants are enlivened to serve one another in word and deed, not only in the church but in the world.””

“If, then, it be asked: How do you understand the Second Commandment, or what is meant by taking in vain, or misusing God’s name? answer briefly thus: It is misusing God’s name when we call upon the Lord God no matter in what way, for purposes of falsehood or wrong of any kind. Therefore this commandment enjoins this much, that God’s name must not be appealed to falsely, or taken upon the lips while the heart knows well enough, or should know, differently; as among those who take oaths in court, where one side lies against the other. For God’s name cannot be misused worse than for the support of falsehood and deceit.”

“Therefore let every one know that it is his duty, at the risk of God’s
displeasure, not only to do no injury to his neighbor, nor to deprive
him of gain, nor to perpetrate any act of unfaithfulness or malice in
any bargain or trade, but faithfully to preserve his property for him,
to secure and promote his advantage, especially when one accepts money, wages, and one’s livelihood for such service.”

“And yet we pretend to be godly, know how to adorn ourselves most finely and conceal our rascality, resort to and invent adroit devices and deceitful artifices (such as now are daily most ingeniously contrived) as though they were derived from the law codes; yea, we even dare impertinently to refer to it, and boast of it, and will not have it called rascality, but shrewdness and caution. In this lawyers and jurists assist, who twist and stretch the law to suit it to their cause, stress words and use them for a subterfuge, irrespective of equity or their neighbor’s necessity. And, in short, whoever is the most expert and cunning in these affairs finds most help in law, as they themselves say: Vigilantibus iura subveniunt [that is, The laws favor the watchful].”

“Companies don’t want to go to court because it puts them on a level playing field. Courts are ruled by law, legal precedent, and legal discovery, which allows litigants to obtain information and evidence from their opponents or from third parties.”…North Carolina Consumers Council

“The insurance companies understand that if they deny and deny claims, then many of the claimants will never pursue their claim,”…ABC News Good Morning America April 25, 2008

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”…Ephesians 6:12

If the following is true, I hope that Key Risk is sued for every penny they have and put out of business.

From the Charlotte Observer via InsuranceNewsNet.com October 23, 2018.

In 2003, after Mario Seguro-Suarez fell 18 feet head-first onto the concrete floor of his Lincolnton workplace, his employer and its insurance carrier acknowledged that his disabling brain injury qualified him for workers’ compensation benefits.

Court documents reveal the lengths that Key Risk Insurance Co. went not to pay them.

The Greensboro-based company disregarded years of medical opinions — including several from its own doctors — that Seguro-Suarez was indeed left disabled from his fall at the Southern Fiber factory, documents show.

Over the past 15 years, Key Risk has made multiple trips to courts and before the N.C. Industrial Commission to argue that Seguro-Suarez has been faking his symptoms and that his benefits should be cut off.

First, it had the idled worker followed and videotaped for weeks, court documents say. A private investigator then took what a detective would describe as misleading information to Lincolnton police to accuse Seguro-Suarez of insurance fraud. He was arrested, jailed and later indicted.

The charges were thrown out in 2014, drawing a withering rebuke from the Lincoln County judge who heard them.

Now, Seguro-Suarez and his attorneys are suing Key Risk and others for malicious prosecution. In September, the N.C. Court of Appeals — the state’s second highest judicial body — refused the company’s motion to have the 2016 lawsuit thrown out.

Charlotte attorney Woody Connette, who is serving as legal guardian for Seguro-Suarez in his Key Risk lawsuit because the worker has been found incapable of representing himself, says the company’s actions are unlike any he’s encountered in his 40-year legal career.

“I have seen some outrageous abuses of the system by insurance companies, but this is the most outrageous,” Connette told the Observer.”

“Seguro-Suarez’ fall in January 2003 left him in a coma and put him on a respirator.

Following emergency brain surgery at Carolinas Medical Center in Charlotte, the Costa Rican native was unable to clothe, feed or clean himself, documents say. He also displayed radical mood swings and was deemed incapable of returning to work.

A doctor who treated Seguro-Suarez described him as “childlike.” One of his workers’ comp attorneys, Rick Anderson of Charlotte, says multiple tests place Seguro-Suarez’ current IQ at around 70, in the bottom 1 percent of all North Carolinians.”

The criminal case against him began crumbling early on. After his first court appearance, a psychologist with the state prison system found Seguro-Suarez mentally incapable of standing trial, documents say.

“In October 2016, Seguro-Suarez sued for malicious prosecution. The complaint names Key Risk and four of its employees, including Senior Vice President Joseph Abriola, as defendants. Hill, the investigator, is also included.

Key Risk appealed. In January 2017, Superior Court Judge Jesse Caldwell of Gaston County refused to dismiss the complaint. Again, Key Risk challenged the ruling, this time to the Court of Appeals. In September, Key Risk again lost.

In June, the Industrial Commission rejected the latest company latest appeal and locked in Seguro-Suarez’ benefits for life.”

“Committed to honesty, integrity and fairness
Insurance companies are subject to a lot of rules. National and state governments and other regulatory organizations have established a vast array. At AAL, we recognize the importance of these rules and work diligently to follow them. Then we take an extra step.
We choose to hold ourselves to a higher ethical standard than the regulations demand. We’re part of the Insurance Marketplace Standards Association–more commonly known as IMSA.”…AAL (Thrivent) Correspondent January/February 2002

“the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.”…LA Times October 27, 2014

“The secret of life is honesty, and fair
dealing. If you can fake that you’ve got it made.”…Groucho Marx

Thrivent, a Lutheran connected fraternal organization has been in the news for the past several years trying to maintain it’s dispute resolution, MDRP, contract dictate in lieu of litigation, despite challenges from the DOL.

It claims it’s approach of appeal, mediation and arbitration is in the best interest of its members.

It also touts its Christian based approaches and ethics awards.

Is it buying the ethics awards?

From a recent lawsuit against Thrivent:

“Executive sues Thrivent, saying he was fired because he is black”

“A black executive claims he was fired as president of a Thrivent Financial subsidiary because he accused a co-worker of racial discrimination, according to a lawsuit he filed against the financial services firm.

Gregory M. Smith, who said he was recruited by Thrivent in 2016 to help grow its network of independent insurance brokers, said he was stunned to encounter discrimination at a Fortune 500 company whose mission is “helping Christians be wise with money and live generously.”

“I was shocked,” said Smith, 56, who has worked at some of the largest insurance companies in the U.S. “I have never been treated so badly in my life.”

“Thrivent Financial, which manages more than $100 billion in assets, boasts of its corporate culture, noting on its website that it has been named one of the world’s “most ethical companies” six years in a row by the Ethisphere Institute.”

“Thrivent, a not-for-profit membership organization that helps Christians be wise with money and live generously, announced today it has been recognized by the Ethisphere Institute, a global leader in defining and advancing the standards of ethical business practices, as one of the 2018 World’s Most Ethical Companies.”

“For the last seven years, Thrivent has been honored to be named a World’s Most Ethical Company,” said Brad Hewitt, CEO of Thrivent. “As we serve our members and carry out what it means to be an ethical company through our actions and business practices, we are pleased to be recognized as leaders in setting a standard that we hope will continue to develop within the business community.”

“Sometime in the next week or so, something called the Ethisphere Institute is scheduled to announce this year’s list of the “World’s Most Ethical Companies.” If past years are any indication, the winners will have their press releases ready to go, and news outlets across the country will eat it up. There’s just one hitch: These ethics awards—let’s call them the Ethies—may have ethics issues of their own.

The Ethisphere Insitute, which describes itself as “a leading international think-tank dedicated to the creation, advancement and sharing of best practices in business ethics, corporate social responsibility, anti-corruption and sustainability,” is actually a for-profit company. The institute also lends itself credibility with an “advisory panel” of ethicists, yet several former members say they’ve had little if anything to do with it. Finally, the institute and an affiliated company sell services to and collect fees from some of the same companies Ethisphere extols.”

“The scoring is based mostly on information provided by the companies themselves, and Ethisphere says its questionnaire should take 30 to 40 minutes to complete. Ethisphere then asks companies for documentation to support survey answers and reviews other sources, such as news articles, court records, and Consumer Reports. Ethisphere says it reviewed more than 10,000 corporations for last year’s list.

Brigham acknowledges that the system is imperfect. “Could they be lying to us?” he says. “Sure, they could. … Over time, we’re going to have to figure out how to verify that. And no one is going to pay us to verify it, and if we try to charge them to verify it, we’re going to have reporters like you make it sound like we’re getting paid off.”

Ethisphere says its methodology was developed with the help of a panel of independent experts. But as I dialed up half a dozen of the 20 committee members, I found only one (George Ash) who said he actually contributed to shaping the methodology. Others said they made a suggestion that wasn’t heeded (Thomas Donaldson), or didn’t seriously analyze the methodology (Patrick Barwise, John Dienhart, Chris MacDonald), or didn’t know they were on the panel (Karen Paul). Ethisphere says that it assumed panel members who didn’t respond to its queries simply agreed with the methodology and that each member explicitly agreed to be on the panel. Since my inquiries, Ethisphere has named a new, smaller panel, and none of the people I spoke to are still on it.”

“It’s tempting, of course, to dismiss all this as just corporate window-dressing, and in fact Canadian ethicist Chris MacDonald, who until recently was on Ethisphere’s advisory panel, warned me to take such awards “with a grain of salt.” And then there are people like Gretchen Winter, former ethics officer for “World’s Most Ethical” winner Baxter International and current director of the Center for Professional Responsibility in Business and Society at the University of Illinois. Winter says the institute’s conflicts of interest and reliance on self-reported information make its awards “less credible.” At the same time, she says, the awards help in “advancing the conversation about ethics and compliance programs in the executive suites and boardrooms.”

They may just as easily be used, however, to squelch conversation. Last year, while working on another story, I was interviewing a corporate spokesman about allegations of fraud against his company and government fines for a radioactive waste spill. He sent me a press release trumpeting the news that Ethisphere had named his engineering and construction firm, CH2M Hill, one of the “World’s Most Ethical.” It “speaks for itself,” he said. If only he knew.”

“The ethics of firms paying to be honored for ethics

“It’s apparently a point of honor among some corporations to be named one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies. There already are rankings, after all, for the World’s Most Admired Companies and the Best Companies to Work For.

Blue Shield issued a press release in March saying that it had been recognized as one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies for the third year in a row. The company said the honor had been earned because of Blue Shield’s “strong culture of ethical behavior and integrity.”

Dozens of other companies issued similar press releases around the same time. Waste Management, the garbage-disposal company that in 2011 paid $7.5 million to settle charges that it broke Massachusetts environmental laws, touted its inclusion among the World’s Most Ethical Companies.

So did Eastman Chemical, which faces lawsuits alleging that it did not adequately warn of the dangers of a chemical that spilled into a West Virginia river earlier this year, leaving more than 300,000 people without water for days.”

“Apparently, Blue Shield and Ethisphere haven’t quite grasped that the appearance of a conflict can be just as troubling as an actual conflict.

Nor do they seem to understand that the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.